I find this first sentence in the article somewhat illogical:
“Attempting to read the divine will is a notoriously perilous enterprise”
Do the Editors of National Review believe in God or not?
If not, then they should openly say so because that’s the only way the above sentence can make sense.
If they do believe in God and He creates life, then I don’t see how the conception of a child cannot be God’s divine will.
That would work great in a religious discussion. In politics, it is a losing proposition. Just ask Joe Miller, Doug Hoffman , Sharron Angle, Christine O’Donell, Ken Buck or JD Hayworth how much they can help push forward the pro-life agenda.
In politics, winning is everything, losing means you have zero power to push any agenda.